Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 10th September 2008, 04:12 PM   #1
Ed
Member
 
Ed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 237
Default Blast from the past: An Oakeschott Sword

There are a couple of threads about some of my objects that are pretty old (ca. 2000) yet have, I think some interest still.





This was my original post
Quote:
I recently purchased a sword at auction that belonged to Oakeshott. Rather than post pictures I direct you to the following reference: The Archaeology of Weapons, plate 20 b. This sword has been referenced many times in Oakeshotts works, generally dated to ca. 1450. (also Sword in the Age of Chivilry plate 43 b, and so on, I can provide other references for anyone interested).

Now, my question is this: I have had my dear friends at the Met in NY examine this sword and their position is that it is highly composite. The blade might be 1450 or so, but the assemblage' is later.

By their admission they LOOK for fakes and would rather let 10 good ones go by if they can kick out one bad one.

What do you folks think? Inquiring minds want to know.
I will re-post comments from Jim, Lee and Scott Bubar unless there are objections.

Ah, yes ... the original thread is here

http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000018.html
Ed is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.